nydailynews_author

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

No annotations are present, so the description carries the burden of behavioral disclosure. It does disclose that the profile is 'public' and enumerates the returned data, which is useful. However, it does not mention authentication needs, error behavior, pagination of recent articles, or whether the operation is read-only, leaving some behavioral gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single tightly written sentence: purpose first, followed by a concise list of returned fields. There is no filler, repetition, or unnecessary detail, and every clause adds useful information.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple two-parameter read tool with full schema coverage, the description provides enough orientation, including the output contents. The main missing piece is explicitly stating that one of slug or URL should be supplied, since both parameters are marked optional in the schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already describes both parameters fully (URL as an alternative to slug, and slug with an example), so schema coverage is 100%. The description adds no additional parameter-level meaning beyond what the schema provides, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Get a New York Daily News author profile.' It also enumerates the returned fields (name, job title, bio, email, X/Twitter handle, recent articles), making the purpose unambiguous. It does not explicitly distinguish itself from siblings like nydailynews_article, but the author-profile resource is clear from name and description.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies the use case: choose this tool when you need a New York Daily News author's public profile and recent articles. It does not provide explicit when-not-to-use guidance, alternatives, or advice on how to choose between slug and URL, leaving some selection logic to the agent.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.